Peaks without Bob: an experiment

Evenreven · Post by **Evenreven** » Thu Nov 29, 2007 2:52 pm

In the spirit of the continuing second season changes thread...

I have often - since I saw Pretty as a Picture and learned the Frank Silva story - wondered what Peaks would have been without the closed ending and Bob. Let's suppose they didn't have to make it. In the pilot we can hardly see Bob and it could as well have been labelled a goof. So then what happens? What would a Bob-less Peaks been like?

Boring? More soap opera-like? Would the one-armed man have been a villain (we see him in the elevator)?

As I recall, the whole closed ending was written and filmed after the shooting of the pilot was done. Have Lynch or Frost ever said what their plans for the next episodes were before this idea came into being? Did they even have any?

Looking forward to hearing if you have any thoughts or wild guesses.

Audrey Horne · Post by **Audrey Horne** » Thu Nov 29, 2007 5:19 pm

ugh, why must you do this?

I have my hands, er, mind full with juggling a whole other second season and beyond story line.

well, we know Lynch and Frost met up and started brainstorming a Peyton Place style soap with a murder framing it. They've also (well, Frost anyway) have stated it was always Leland whether or not you believe it or not. If it was always Leland, then it would be a pretty tough murder -and equally horrific. And therefore it already deals with a murderers deep, dark demons -so I feel pyschological elements enter into it, and with that the subconsious, and with that -leading to dreams and delusions. It probably would still come into the fore anyway to some degree. Ouch, I don't know -I'll have to think about it.

Post by **Brad D** » Thu Nov 29, 2007 9:50 pm

this is tough...hard to even imagine. i dare say bob is just as important as coop to twin peaks, even if he's not seen too often. i think outside of coop, the palmers, bob and maybe truman you could have the series without any certain cast member.

Evenreven · Post by **Evenreven** » Fri Nov 30, 2007 2:42 am

But they were all part of the original concept and script, Bob wasn't. And I think that's interesting.

They've also (well, Frost anyway) have stated it was always Leland whether or not you believe it or not. If it was always Leland, then it would be a pretty tough murder -and equally horrific. And therefore it already deals with a murderers deep, dark demons -so I feel pyschological elements enter into it, and with that the subconsious, and with that -leading to dreams and delusions. It probably would still come into the fore anyway to some degree.

I believe Frost. And I think you're right. There would be a certain demonic presence anyway. There's a reason why Lynch jumped at the chance immediately when Silva almost got accidently locked in Laura's room during shooting - he saw that this was a great way of bringing a symbolic demon character not only into the story, but into the very house where both killer and victim lived. There was not only room for Bob in the future of the series, the script was practically begging for it.

But could Peaks have been as powerful with a more straightforward approach? (And by straightforward I mean "realist"; Coop and Sarah are dreaming or having visions of all kinds of crazy stuff, but people don't SEE Bob in real life, neither the gifted nor the damned.) Probably not, but it's interesting to think about, at least it is to me.

ugh, why must you do this?

I can't help it! You don't have to reply, y'know.

Spiralizer · Post by **Spiralizer** » Sat Dec 01, 2007 5:25 pm

I wouldn't want to think of TP without Bob. Not to say that it wouldn't have been good without him, but Bob just glues everything together so well, it's hard to think of one without the other. Plus Bob scares the sh*t out of me still. Ronette's vision in the hospital and Maddy seeing Bob in the Palmer house are absolutely insane scenes.

TheArm · Post by **TheArm** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:15 pm

Personally, I love the whole BOB character/concept and I wouldn't want to lose him. He's essential to the Twin Peaks experience for me, not to mention the fact that he's absolutely terrifying. That being said, I do think that the 2nd season's focus on him might have been part of its downfall with the general public. It definitely turned my roommate off, who is the epitome of mainstream taste; she was really into the first season, but as the BOB storyline ramped up more and more in season 2, the more she seemed to find the show laughable (often in moments that were definitely NOT supposed to be funny). When she cracked up with laughter at the scene where Leland/BOB kills Maddy, I knew I was done showing her the series...

But I agree with the earlier poster that even if it wasn't Frank Silva and BOB per se, I'm sure that this would have manifested itself in some other strange supernatural/dream entity, as these folks seem to pop up in most of Lynch's works eventually...

coolspringsj · Post by **coolspringsj** » Tue Dec 18, 2007 12:20 pm

Peaks without Bob is like the Rolling Stones without Mick Jagger and Keith Richards.

Evenreven · Post by **Evenreven** » Wed Dec 19, 2007 7:32 am

No, it's not. That's basically calling the original script - which gave Frost and Lynch financing to do a pilot and hire an amazing cast - worthless, because there's sure as hell no Bob there. What I find in the "Northwest Passage" script is an amazing story about abstract evil seen through the eyes of a whole town in mourning. Whether or not inhabiting spirits would have entered the picture wouldn't have changed that. Also note that Sarah doesn't have the vision in the script, there's only a quick cut to the hand removing the rock and the necklace. Instead fear is established as the main driving force of the series through a comment from mayor Milford that probably never was shot. As much as I love Bob and Sarah having visions, I think it's interesting that Sarah's vision was put in the shooting script at a later date, and that Bob happened by accident.

Lynch and Frost are Jagger and Richards. A Bob-less Peaks would have been Richards and Jones with a different singer. Probably not as good, but an interesting thought.